Ramirez v. Certain Individuals et al

Filing 12

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION (rslc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/26/2024) Copy of order mailed to plaintiff.Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) Modified on 9/26/2024 (cl, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

ELIAS TORRES RAMIREZ,

Case No. 24-cv-03323-RS

Plaintiff,
10
v.

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14
15

Self-represented plaintiff Elias Torres Ramirez filed this complaint and an application for

16

leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The matter was randomly assigned to a magistrate judge who

17

granted plaintiff’s IFP application and screened the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(E).

18

Plaintiff was ordered to file a first amended complaint addressing the deficiencies identified in the

19

screening order by August 30, 2024. Plaintiff was warned failure to file a timely first amended

20
21
22
23
24

complaint would result in a recommendation that his action be dismissed.
Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint, and the time to do so expired. The magistrate
judge has recommended that plaintiff’s action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to
prosecute. Plaintiff has not filed any response to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. Good
cause appearing, the magistrate judge’s recommendation is hereby adopted and this action is
dismissed.

25
26
27
28

1

IT IS SO ORDERED.

2
3
4
5

Dated: September 26, 2024
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
Chief United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CASE NO.

2

24-cv-03323-RS